(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "The United States and Canada : the commencement oration, Syracuse University, June 14th, 1911"

k , ,T : 



5ty? Intirii States attft (ttmrcia 

THE COMMENCEMENT ORATION, 

SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, 

JUNE 14th, 1911. 



BY- 



KING'S BENCH DIVISION, H.C.J. 
ONTARIO 



LP 

fsoiz 

191! 




'■■■; 



73^ EDITH and LORNE PIERCE 
COLLECTION o/CANADIANA 




Queen's University at Kingston 



With the Compliments of 

William Renwick Riddell. 



QIt]# Inttrf* States wxh 

The Commencement Oration, Syracuse University, June 14th, 1911. 
THE HONOURABLE WILLIAM RENWICK RIDDELL, L.H.D., ETC. 

Mr. Chancellor, Fathers and Brethren, Ladies and 
Gentlemen: 

When I say that I am glad to be here — now — I am 
not simply using the language of mere convention. 

I am come to you from the adjoining nation and 
from a University which her sons delight to honour, 
calling her, as she indeed is, the largest University 
under the British flag ; they do not in their devotion 
go so far as to say that she is the greatest University 
under the British flag — as yet — but with the opti- 
mism which characterizes the Canadian, they consider 
even that to be but a matter of years — few, it is hoped. 

I bring you greetings from that land and that Uni- 
versity, and wish you every possible blessing. 

We are told across the Lake, that there are million- 
aires at the back of this University ; and if that is so, 
we rejoice. But it may be but an invention of the 
enemy. 

" Are millionaires common in America V asked a 
stranger. " They are," answered the American, 
11 most of them." If millionaires are responsible for 



the buildings of this University, it is a matter of re- 
gret that they are not more common — in the one sense. 
No person common in the other sense could have con- 
ceived their erection or brought it about in beauty 
and harmony as they exist. And we might well pray 
that more of such benefactors should be found to aid 
in the cause of higher education by furnishing chaste 
and lovely temples for its pursuit. 

But whatever and whoever may be at the back of 
Syracuse University, I can bear personal testimony 
that at its head there stands a mari — 

"A man with head, heart, hand 
Like some of the great simple ones gone, 
****** 

Who can rule and dare not lie." 
— a man who lives by old George Herbert's precept, 

* ' Do all things like a man, not sneakingly, ' ' 

and who "girt by friend or foe," says "the thing he 
will." 

Was it not Garfield who said, " Dr. Mark Hopkins 
at one end of a log and a student at the other — that is 
a University "f How much more may we say, " Dr. 
Day at one end of this institute of learning and these 
four thousand students at the other — that is a great 
University "? 

And I most heartily and sincerely congratulate him 
and you on the progress made by this University, be- 
lieving and appreciating as I do that advance in true 
culture and true learning in this University and in 
this State cannot be without its influence, not only 
upon this great Union, but also upon the world at 
large, and not least of all upon my own beloved 
Canada. 

I am to speak to you of the United States and 
Canada. 

On the northern shore of Lake Erie, our magnifi- 
cent inland sea, are many projections of the land to- 



ward the South, as it were stretching out Canadian 
hands to the sister country. And on one of the best 
known of these stand two tall shafts of pine, topped 
with r verdure never failing. These grow from the 
same soil and spring from the same root; above, 
they are distinct and wholly self-contained. The 
pillars stand near together, yet never clash — the 
lighter, more conspicuous portions of the trees do in- 
deed intermingle : and ever and anon, when stirred by 
gale or tempest, their branches chafe and fret in noisy 
commotion. But with the passing of the storm passes 
also the fury of contending branch: with the calm 
comes again the peaceful and harmonious interlacing 
of limb and twig and needle — and the oscillating shaft 
nodding to its sister is gladdened by the peace above. 
Long years have these sisters stood on the shore of our 
Lake, and long have they symbolized the two peoples 
living on its opposite shores. 

For the United States and Canada are from the 
same soil, have grown on the same continent ; they are 
sprung from the same root and glory in the same an- 
cestry — and while the lighter part of each has, when 
stirred by the tempest of passion, jarred and fretted 
and chafed, the solid portion has, in the main, stood 
firm ; and when the storm was over and quiet reigned, 
those who had wrangled and lashed resumed friendly 
communion and intermingled one with the other in 
peace and harmony. 

" Behold how good and how pleasant it is for 
brethren to dwell together in unity." 

The histories are full of war and battle — tales of 
bloodshed and suffering are told to child and adult — 
but who has told the story of the long and abiding 
peace on each side of the longest international bound- 
ary in the world ? 

Four thousand miles stretches the line between the 
United States and Canada: and never a fortification 
or a stronghold — the so-called forts are mere glorified 
farmhouses, the earthworks like deserted potato-pits 



— the petty garrisons kept at a few points do no more 
than play at soldiering — and red coat and blue are 
rather brothers than members of the army of two 
nations. 

And long may it so continue — yea, in aeternos 
annos. 

This peace is, I venture to assert, due to recog- 
nition of our kinship — and it did not exist at the be- 
ginning of the continent's history. For Canada was 
always a source of great anxiety to the Colonists to 
the south while she was French — and from the very 
first there was the most fixed determination not to 
allow the French to come within striking distance of 
" the Lord's own people " who spoke English and 
were Protestant. 

Even so early as 1613 the Colony, led by a Jesuit 
father and sailing from Honfleur, which had settled 
on Mt. Desert (the Island off the coast of Maine, now 
so well known) was attacked by the Virginian, Cap- 
tain Samuel Argall, who has been called " a sea- 
captain with piratical tastes" — and he carried off 
fifteen French in chains, and set the rest adrift on 
the stormy sea. Virginia sent her ships north and de- 
stroyed every vestige of French occupation of the 
Island, " visited " Ste. Croix and burnt Port Royal. 

The expedition in 1628 and 1629, led by David 
Kirke (Kertk), who might be fairly described in the 
same language as Argall, cannot be credited to the 
colonies: but it is safe to say that it was made for 
their sake. Kirke 's conquest of Quebec had but little 
effect upon the history of either part of North 
America ; though Quebec was British for three years, 
the peace of St. Germain-en-Laye (1632) gave France 
back her own — her New France. 

Thereafter, for a century and a quarter, the Eng- 
lish colonist supplied the Iroquois with arms and 
ammunition, wherewith to commit havoc on the 
Frenchman — while the French, not to be behindhand 
in their thoughtful care for the white man, gave arms 



and ammunition to the Francophile aborigines, 
Huron and Algonquin. English Indians invaded 
Canada and ravaged that land, as French Indians 
invaded New England and ravaged that — and 
there can be little doubt that there was not much 
to choose between them, although, indeed, we hear 
more about the Indian slaughter of the English- 
speaking Americans — all the English colonists could 
write — and most of them did. 

New York did not become English in allegiance 
till 1664, when Colonel Richard Nicolls took posses- 
sion for the Duke of York; but she lost no time in 
showing herself English, both in feeling and in enter- 
prise (for the short period of renewed Dutch rule in 
1673 and 1674 may be disregarded), and indeed she 
had been more than half Anglicised before her change 
of flag. In the decade, 1680-1690, both English and 
Dutch in New York endeavoured by presents, and 
especially by furnishing gratis, guns, powder and 
lead, to induce the Iroquois to war against the French 
— and it was only the view of the Iroquois that it 
would be better first of all to destroy the Christian 
Indians, allies of the French-Canadians, that saved 
New France from a most devastating and horrible 
warfare at that time — the subjects of James II hesi- 
tated themselves to attack the subjects of his French 
friend; but they had no compunctions about doing 
by Indians what they would have liked to do in 
person. "Qui facit per alium, facit per se" does not 
always apply internationally. 

But on the 13th February, 1689, William and Mary 
were proclaimed King and Queen of England; and 
the long course of Stewart truckling to France came 
to an end. 

In 1690, the Grand Alliance of Germany, Spain, 
Holland and England was formed against Louis 
XIV ; and this continent did not fail of its share of 
war. The Le Moynes set out from Montreal against 
New York and Hertel from Three Rivers — and these 



captured and destroyed Schenectady and Salmon 
Falls; while a third expedition from Quebec under 
Portneuf captured and sacked Canso. 

But Boston and New York were awake. A Con- 
ference was held at Albany at which the invasion of 
Canada by land and sea was determined upon ; and the 
Kennebec backwoodsman, William Phips, was ap- 
pointed to lead the retaliatory fleet. He failed to 
take Quebec, though he had under his command men 
from Massachusetts, Connecticut and Plymouth. 
Sons of Connecticut may, if they choose, account for 
this failure by the fact that their country had with- 
drawn part of her contingent to protect her own 
northern settlements. 

The- force invading by land composed of sixteen 
hundred New Yorkers who went by Lake Champlain 
had no better fortune at Laprairie. 

Then the colonists urged the mother country to 
send an expedition for the conquest of Canada ; and 
in 1692 it was decided to grant this request. Accord- 
ingly, in 1693, a fleet was organized to reduce Martin- 
ique first, and thereafter Quebec; but it was so re- 
duced by sickness that the project had to be aband- 
oned. Indeed, this fleet did more harm to Boston than 
to Martinique, for the sickness introduced by it was 
most destructive — after killing about two-thirds of 
the sailors and soldiers, it proved in Boston to be the 
most malignant ever known : so much so indeed as to 
drive many of the inhabitants away from the city. 
And they were Bostonians; and the city they were 
leaving was Boston. 

Then the volcano slept — though mutterings were 
from time to time heard, and the earth was seldom 
still. In 1709 both land and sea forces were sent 
against Canada; and at length, in 1711, an advance 
was made against Quebec with a failure still more 
pronounced and even disgraceful. In this expedition, 
which set out from Boston under Sir Hovenden 
[Walker, with Imperial and Massachusetts troops, 



everything was mismanaged. Ships were wrecked and 
hundreds were drowned. Quebec was never even 
reached — the Admiral thought, or at least said, that 
the wreck was a merciful intervention of Providence 
to prevent more fatal mischiefs. Perhaps it was — 
had it not been for that wreck, there might now be no 
Canada. 

Acadia was being occupied, and the hinterland 
of the colonies was becoming important — the whole 
Lake George-Lake Champlain district was the seat 
of inextinguishable warfare, guerilla and other- 
wise, between the two irreconcilable people; and 
at last in 1754 Wolfe was commanded to take 
Quebec. The colonies were called upon to furnish 20,- 
000 men, and they did furnish 17,500 : Massachusetts, 
7,000; Connecticut, 5,000; Rhode Island and New 
Jersey each 1,000; New Hampshire, 800, and New 
York, 2,680. The relative importance of the colonies 
is shown by the number of men raised, Connecticut 
supplying many more than New York, and Massa- 
chusetts nearly three times New York's quota (but 
of course Massachusetts included what is now Maine) . 

The belief which had become firmly established 
throughout Canada that Quebec was unassailable by 
water, proved not quite fallacious. Quebec fell, but it 
fell assailed by way of the Plains of Abraham. Ticon- 
deroga was avenged. The colonies had their wish and 
the toast was fulfilled, " British colours on every 
French fort, post and garrison in America." 

It is a satisfaction to know that the three American 
grenadiers captured by the French at Quebec were 
not burnt alive as their friends feared they would be. 
The 2nd and 3rd battalions of Royal Americans 
were with the besieging army and did their duty man- 
fully; and no difference was made between them and 
the other English taken prisoner. 

And now took place what the more acute observers 
had foreseen, and some had openly prophesied. When 
the fear of starvation or privation is removed, the 



young man may safely, if he is so inclined, treat the 
old folks lightly — while they in turn cannot think of 
him as anything but a mere boy wholly unfit to gov- 
ern himself or his household. The English (which 
by this time had become British) Colonies, relieved 
from the ever-pressing fear of invasion from the 
alien North, had time to consider their relations with 
the mother country. So long as the next day might 
bring a hostile raid by Frenchman or Indian, the 
assistance of British troops was very desirable, and 
greatly desired. Nor was there much complaint even 
if these troops had to be supported by the colonists 
whose homes they protected — and that though these 
colonists had not the full control of the money raised 
for that purpose. 

But when there was no longer any fear of French 
soldier, civilized or savage, as all to the North was 
now become also British, the case was changed. 

It is a part of the very life of English-speaking 
people that they must govern themselves — for well or 
ill. Swarms leave the mother hive: these set up a 
new hive for themselves, governed after the ancestral 
model, indeed, but self-governed. There is no such 
phenomenon in English-speaking colonization as in 
the ancient Greek — nor were these colonists chosen by 
lot or sent from an inferior grade of the people ; they 
came of their own choice, and many of England's best 
and bravest found their place in the ranks of the ven- 
turesome settlers of the American wilds. 

I do not know whether you consider it a matter of 
pride or not — probably not — but it must be said that 
New York was not the leader in opposition to the 
claims of the government of King George — perhaps 
Massachusetts was the most determined and self- 
asserting. Whoever the leader, arbitrary acts were 
met by stubborn resistance ; and at length a deplor- 
able, though perhaps inevitable, war broke out be- 
tween mother and daughter; and America claimed 
independence. 

8 



Canada was never long absent from the minds of 
the leaders of the revolted colonies. It was always a 
desideratum that Canada should join the Union and 
so round off the federation of States. Canada, Brit- 
ish, might be dangerous to the colonies now anti- 
British, as she was when anti-British to them still 
British. The Continental Congress meeting at Phila- 
delphia issued an address to the Canadians, filled with 
turgid rhetoric, and more fitted as an argument 
to philosophers than an appeal to simple people like 
the inhabitants of Canada. The address wholly failed 
in its object. Not that the French-Canadians had 
become enthusiastic British subjects — they had re- 
fused to furnish the Governor, Sir Guy Carleton, with 
provisions for his troops. The address printed in 
Philadelphia reached very few Canadians : fewer still 
could read : and those who could read knew of an ad- 
dress to the people of England by that same Congress 
complaining bitterly of favour shown to the Cana- 
dians as a gross betrayal of Protestant principles and 
inveighing against the toleration of Popery, " that 
blood-thirsty, idolatrous and hypocritical creed.' ' 
Catholics who had been repeatedly and in the most 
solemn manner assured of the free exercise of their 
religion under the British flag were not likely to 
choose rather the fellowship in allegiance of those 
whose representatives so thought and so spoke of 
their beloved Church and most cherished beliefs. 

Montgomery and Arnold were sent North against 
Montreal and Quebec — the erratic Ethan Allen had 
made a dismal failure. Montreal was taken, and Mont- 
gomery hastened to assist Arnold at Quebec. Mont- 
gomery died and Arnold failed. 

To Montreal during its occupancy by the Ameri- 
cans came three Commissioners, Benjamin Franklin 
being one, taking with them a French printer 
from Philadelphia; and they issued appeals to the 
people — in vain. The priests, who could read, were 
immovable — they had been treated with at least re- 



spect by the British, they were treated with contume- 
ly and even with physical harshness by the Colonials 
— the British had paid in gold for all the stores taken 
and labour exacted by them, the Colonials, if they 
paid at all, paid in paper — and the paper was repu- 
diated by Congress. It is said that the cheating and 
trickery of the "Bastonnais" is still a tradition in 
parts of Quebec after a century and a half, as the 
Angevin Kings of England are still remembered and 
execrated by the peasants in parts of France after a 
lapse of six hundred years. 

But while all parties recognized that it would be 
for the advantage of the United Colonies that Canada 
should join them and so cease to be British, George 
"Washington was sufficiently clear-sighted to recog- 
nize that it was better for his country that Canada 
should be British than that she should become once 
more French. For, he said, France with a foothold 
on the left in Canada, on the right in Louisiana and 
holding all the West of the Continent in the rear of 
the new nation, would be a greater menace than a 
British Canada. It is not too much to say that, even 
then, it was, at least by Washington, appreciated that 
" blood is thicker than water"; he frowned down 
Lafayette's plan to invade Canada with the aid of 
troops obtained from France. 

The revolted colonies wholly failed to carry Can- 
ada with them; but they achieved independence for 
thernselves — the wretchedly-conducted war came to 
an end. 

The law-abiding and law-seeking genius of the race 
asserted itself — for I maintain that the Anglo-Saxon 
is essentially a lover of law, and of law as a means of 
deciding disputes. There was, of course, no room in 
the preliminary articles of 1782, or even in the defi- 
nitive Treaty of Peace of 1783 for anything but a 
statement of the rights of the contracting parties: 
but when time showed that they were not exactly 
agreed as to the meaning and import of the words 

10 



they had employed in common, the case was different. 
A legislature may declare the rights of parties by a 
Statute, or parties may make a written agreement; 
but if they disagree as to the meaning of the words 
employed by the legislature or by themselves, that 
meaning must be found, fixed and determined by 
some tribunal — unless, indeed, the parties fight it out 
physically. 

War is the international equivalent of trial by 
combat — and war even yet is not wholly obsolete: 
44 "lis true 'tis pity, and pity 'tis 'tis true." 

But these two English peoples, the insular and the 
continental, had more sense than to rush to war to 
determine their respective rights under their agree- 
ment. And, accordingly, the celebrated John Jay, 
when sent to have the rights of the American people 
better defined, as well as to arrange matters which 
had already led to some trouble, and might lead to 
more, willingly agreed that the rights as declared by 
the former treaty should be submitted to a tribunal 
for decision — while he secured a further agreement as 
to other matters of international irritation. His 
treaty, that of 1794, has justly been called the start- 
ing point of international arbitration. (Not that 
arbitration had previously been unknown among 
the nations, for, as all students of history know, 
among the states of European Greece and of Asia 
Minor, arbitration was not at all uncommon. A mo c st 
interesting article — or, indeed, volume — might be 
written upon this topic; and I venture to hope that 
some of the Peace Societies or the Carnegie Trust will 
have the history of international arbitration, ancient 
and modern, written at no distant date.) But the 
Jay Treaty is the first in modern times of an in- 
ternational arbitration between great nations, and, 
consequently, it deserves all the fame which it 
actually enjoys. 

The negotiation of this Treaty, while it forms, per- 
haps, Jay's best claim to immortality, was fatal to 

11 



his honourable and natural ambition to become Presi- 
dent of the United States. Politics were then as bit- 
ter and as unjust as at the present day: and charges 
against Jay of selling his country were made and be- 
lieved in a generation which listened with patience 
and almost with credulity to the charge of defrauding 
the nation made against George Washington — for 
even he was charged with dishonestly taking public 
money. 

Posterity has been kinder and more just. 

By the Treaty of 1794, it was arranged that matters 
in dispute should be referred to arbitration — and 
(with one exception) since that time to this, more 
than 100 years after, there has been no armed conflict 
between the mother country and her loyal colonies on 
the one hand, and the separated colonies on the other 
— a splendid proof of the sense of justice and right on 
either side. 

By Jay's Treaty, it was referred to a Board of 
Arbitrators selected by the two governments with 
another selected by these, to determine what river 
was meant by the "Ste. Croix" in the Treaty of 
Peace. Three arbitrators were sufficient for that. 
But there were claims for money by British subjects 
and American citizens : and with that keen sense of 
the importance of money which has never failed the 
Anglo-Saxon since the times in which he assessed, at 
a* fixed money rate, the value of the life of all from 
king to villein, five arbitrators were to pass upon the 
money claims. The boundary arbitrators failed, 
and so, too, did the arbitrators on the British claims. 
The latter claims were in 1802 compromised 
at £600,000 — while the former dispute continued to 
trouble the nations for forty years longer. The 
boundary was a matter directly affecting Canada, as 
have been most of the matters leading to international 
dispute, negotiation and arbitration. 

Then, as for many years thereafter — and indeed in 
some remote parts even at this day — Americans were 

12 



under the impression — nay, the profound conviction, 
that monarchy is of necessity tyranny and that 
Canada was ground down under the iron heel of 
oppression — and some Americans had sufficient cour- 
age and spirit of self-sacrifice to help her to be 
free. Canada has an awkward way of taking such 
efforts seriously, and of dealing sternly with those 
who interfere with her : accordingly when, shortly be- 
fore the end of the 18th century, agitators from the 
south of the boundary line came into Canada, they 
were looked after with care — and one of them, Mc- 
Lane, was in 1797 drawn, hanged and quartered at 
Quebec for endeavouring to stir up a rebellion against 
the King. 

McLane's scheme involved an invasion by a large 
force from Vermont, well equipped with artillery, 
arms and ammunition. There can be no doubt that 
the government of the United States was quite inno- 
cent of any participation in the plan (it is indeed sug- 
gested that McLane was partially insane) ; but there 
is equally no doubt that the Vermonters wished to 
have the use of the St. Lawrence and had become dis- 
couraged by the attitude of the British Government 
in regard to the navigation laws. 

From almost the very inauguration of the United 
States there was a party of considerable, though 
varying, strength which aimed at the absorption of 
Canada; and from the end of the 18th century, the 
administration in Canada lived in fear of an attack 
from the south. These fears were openly expressed 
in correspondence with the Home authorities ; and at 
length, in 1812, the long anticipated war broke out. 
I do not intend to discuss the real origin and occasion 
of that war. Mr. Forster has done so recently at the 
Washington meeting of the American Society for the 
Judicial Settlement of International Disputes. 

Washington was captured and in part burnt ; but 
so were Newark, the previous, and York (Toronto), 
the then capital of Upper Canada. 

13 



I say nothing further as to the military opera- 
tions and the success and conduct of the troops 
on either side — the Adjutant-General of the State of 
New York, General Verbeck of this city, has said 
something about that very recently. The war was 
wholly unnecessary, and the avowed were not the real 
objects. But that war came soon to an end — it never 
should have begun. 

" Inter arma silent leges," but, "Armibus silenti- 
bus, lex proprium vigorem habet." And, according- 
ly, when the two branches of the race had satiated 
their taste for gore — for they would — and will — any 
time sooner fight than eat — law had its way. The 
Treaty of Ghent was entered into, which provided 
for a determination by arbitration of the matters still 
in dispute (Dec. 24th, 1814). The ostensible causes 
of the war were not so much as mentioned in the 
Treaty. 

There is a bay on the Atlantic coast called the Bay 
of Passamaquoddy, in which are a few islands — of no 
great intrinsic value indeed, but then since Sancho 
Panza's time an " Island" has had a sentimental 
value. (I find that in a solemn law report of a very 
famous case, in 1816, Upper Canada is called an 
"Island" — I presume, by way of compliment.) These 
islands in Passamaquoddy Bay were claimed as form- 
ing part of the United States, and by the other party 
as forming part of Nova Scotia. They were not large, 
but large enough to be a pretext for war, if either 
country really desired it. 

The Treaty of Ghent provided that a Commissioner 
should be appointed by the King, another by the 
President, and that these should determine upon the 
claims. It was provided that if the Commissioners 
could not agree, the matter was to be referred to some 
friendly Sovereign or State. Fortunately, the Com- 
missioners, Messrs. Holmes and Barclay, were able to 
agree: they gave Moose, Dudley and Frederick 

14 



Islands to the United States, and the remainder to 
Britain — and thus that little trouble was settled. 

Commissioners were also appointed to determine 
the northern boundary of Maine : they did not agree : 
it was arranged in 1827 to refer this to a friendly 
Sovereign; and the King of the Netherlands was 
selected. He made an award in 1831 satisfac- 
tory to neither party. Both repudiated it, and the 
boundary was at length settled in 1842 by the Web- 
ster- Ashburton Treaty, or the Ashburton " Capitula- 
tion/' as the sarcastic Palmerston called it. We 
Canadians have not quite got over the " Capitulation" 
yet, and we thank Lord Palmerston for that word. 

But Messrs. Porter and Barclay, the Commission- 
ers appointed under another clause of the Treaty of 
Ghent to determine the boundary at the Lakes On- 
tario, Erie and Huron, were entirely successful in 
arriving at a satisfactory award; and this award 
given at Utica, June 18th, 1822, was received with 
universal approbation. 

Consequently, this Treaty was successful in deter- 
mining two out of three matters of controversy, either 
of which might easily have caused awkward compli- 
cations. 

Then there was another provision in the Treaty of 
Ghent which was destined to give trouble subsequent- 
ly, and that was the article providing for the imme- 
diate delivery and restitution of all property taken 
by the forces of either party during the war. Some 
slaves had been allowed to get away upon the British 
war vessels, etc., and claim was made for their value. 

By the law of England, when a slave's foot touches 
English ground, he becomes free. 

1 ' Slaves cannot breathe in England ; if their lungs 
Receive our air, that moment they are free ; 
They touch our country and their shackles fall. ' ' 

The warship is by international law part of the coun- 

15 



try : and these slaves had therefore become free. Eng- 
land would not give them up, and could not in honour. 
In 1818 an agreement was made that the liability of 
Britain to pay should be determined by some friendly 
Sovereign or State. The matter was referred to the 
Emperor of Russia, and he made a compromise 
award ; then in 1822 it was agreed that the amount to 
be paid should be determined by Commissioners ap- 
pointed by the two governments. In the long run, 
however, a lump sum was agreed upon by the govern- 
ments. This was paid, and so that source of trouble 
was stopped up. 

About 1837, a greater or less number of Canadians 
conceived that they could not, by constitutional 
means, obtain relief from what was undoubtedly a 
wrong system of government — an irresponsible gov- 
ernment—and in both Upper and Lower Canada re- 
bellions broke out, only to be quickly suppressed. 
" Sympathizers" from Vermont made their appear- 
ance in Lower Canada, but met a speedy repulse. 
Mackenzie, the leader of the Rebellion in Upper Can- 
ada, effected his escape from the loyal troops, and 
established himself on Navy Island in the Niagara 
River. A few American sympathizers joined him 
there ; but they did no great harm, and so far as I can 
learn, no good, for only the lawless remained with 
him. All along the international boundary " Hun- 
ters' Lodges" were organized with the purpose and 
design of invading Canada ; and there was in 1838 a 
fiasco of an invasion by a small force which took 
possession of Napierville. They left for home with 
great celerity upon the approach of a British force. 

About the same time an enthusiastic and thorough- 
ly honest patriot, Von Schultz, a Polish refugee in 
the United States, headed a small body of men, who 
landed on Canadian soil near Prescott. He was 
cooped up by the Canadian Militia in the Stone 
Windmill still standing, and after suffering much 
loss, he capitulated with the remainder of his men. 

16 * 



After that awkward manner of theirs, of which I have 
already spoken, the Canadians put him on trial for 
his life at Kingston. He was defended by a young 
lawyer, afterwards the first Prime Minister of the 
Dominion, found guilty and executed with nine 
others: 136 were sentenced to death, but the num- 
ber of 10 was considered sufficient in terrorem. 

Then, at the other end of Upper Canada, a num- 
ber of " Sympathizers," after they had killed a few 
Canadians, were caught by Colonel Prince. Some of 
them were summarily shot, and seven afterwards 
tried by the civil courts, found guilty of murder and 
executed. There never were any more " Sympa- 
thizers" in Canada, Bast or West. Placards were 
posted in Detroit, offering $800 reward for the 
Colonel dead, and $1,000 for him alive ; but he kept 
safe on Canadian soil, and lived for long years there- 
after. 

A very satisfactory arbitration took place in 1854- 
55 under a treaty of 1853, in reference to claims made 
against either country by citizens of the other. 
Joshua Bates, an American who lived in London, was 
appointed Umpire by the two Commissioners, and he 
conducted the arbitration to the common satisfaction 
of all — except those who lost. 

Ever since the organization of the Republic there 
had been trouble about trade matters, and in 1854 a 
treaty was entered into, the well-known " Reciprocity 
Treaty." 

I cannot do much more than simply refer to this 
Treaty, so far as its commercial aspect is concerned. 
After it had been in force for some twelve years it 
was denounced by the United States. While it had 
defects and was not wholly satisfactory to either 
party, it was not these defects which caused its denun- 
ciation. The people of the United States thought — 
rightly or wrongly, I do not enquire — that Britain 
had been unfair in her dealings with the North during 
the Civil War; and the dislike engendered by this 

17 



feeling had its outcome in the international relations 
with Canada. It was thought that Canada should ex- 
perience the resentment felt against her suzerain, and 
should suffer vicariously for her sins. And it was 
openly stated in Congress and elsewhere that Canada 
must be compelled to unite her destinies with those of 
the older and more populous nation to the south, 
under penalty of being cut off from the trade of the 
continent to which they both belonged. 

And so the Treaty was denounced. Whether the 
pact now under consideration will ever come into 
effect or whether, if it should, it will be for the ad- 
vantage of one people or the other, of neither or of 
both, I do not enquire. Such matters are " taboo" to 
His Majesty's Justice. 

But this Treaty of 1854 provided that two Commis- 
sioners should be appointed with power to select, if 
necessary, a third by lot. These were to examine the 
coasts of British America and the United States, and 
determine the places reserved by the Convention of 
1818, etc., for the British fishermen. I cannot say 
that the relations of the two nations in respect of the 
right to fish have ever been all that could be wished. 
Perhaps the award of 1910 may clear the air and 
make these relations more satisfactory and cordial in 
the future. 

While all this was going on in the Bast, there was 
a little dispute in the far West. The Hudson's Bay 
Company and the Puget Sound Agricultural Com- 
pany had, before 1846, become possessed of property, 
farms, etc., in the new territory at what was subse- 
quently the North- Western part of the United States, 
but then a kind of No Man's Land, claimed indeed by 
Britain as well as the United States. When the na- 
tions in 1846 settled that the 49th parallel should be 
the international boundary, it was agreed that the 
possession rights of the Hudson's Bay Company and 
others in occupation of land or other property south 
of that parallel should be respected by the United 

18 



States — and further that any land or other property 
of the Puget Sound Agricultural Company taken by 
the United States should be paid for. As was not 
unnatural the parties could not agree, and, accord- 
ingly, in 1863 a Treaty was entered into for the ap- 
pointment of Commissioners to determine the proper 
amount to be paid. Each Government was to select 
one Commissioner, they if necessary a third — or, if 
they could not agree upon the third man, the King of 
Italy was to select him. Some six years after- 
wards, in 1869, Messrs. Alexander S. Johnson and 
John Rose, the Commissioners, made their award, 
giving the Hudson's Bay Company $450,000 and the 
Puget Sound Agricultural Company $200,000 in full 
of all claims. It will, of course, be apparent that 
this Treaty and award did not affect Canada, as Can- 
ada was then constituted. The Dominion of Canada 
was not formed till 1867, i.e., after the Treaty: and 
British Columbia adjoining the North- West part of 
the United States did not form part of the Dominion 
till 1871, after the award. 

So far all the. Treaties were made without consul- 
tation with Canada. Canada was too young, it was 
thought, to be entrusted with the negotiation of bar- 
gains affecting herself. But in 1871 a change was 
made of great import to all concerned. For the first 
time, a Canadian was named one of the Commission- 
ers to negotiate a treaty with the United States — Sir 
John Alexander Macdonald, K.C.B., Prime Minister 
of the Dominion. It is the firm conviction of many 
Canadians that up to this time the rights and interests 
of Canada never received due consideration — that the 
mother country was too anxious to have peace with 
her revolted and separated daughter to pay adequate 
attention to her who remained a member of the 

family. 

* * #■ •* * ■* 

But thereafter this cannot be said. No treaty 
has, since 1871, been made without the wishes and 

19 



claims of Canada receiving the most hearty considera- 
tion and support. 

The Treaty of Washington, proclaimed 4th July, 
1871, is one of the most important agreements ever 
made between two peoples. 

In the first place, there were the claims arising out 
of the depredations upon American commerce during 
the civil war by the " Alabama" and other vessels 
allowed to escape from British ports. It was agreed 
that a Board of Arbitrators should be appointed, one 
by Britain, one by the United States and one each by 
the King of IJaly, the Emperor of Brazil and the 
President of the Swiss Confederation — to meet at 
Geneva and decide "the Alabama claims' ' as they 
were called. That Board was appointed. It met at 
Geneva, and made an award in which Sir Alexander 
Cockburn, the British Commissioner, did not join — 
on the contrary he entered a most vigorous dissent. 
But Britain made no delay in paying the amount 
awarded. 

Then there were the St. Alban's claim and the like 
arising from acts of Confederates who had been shel- 
tered in or allowed to escape from Canada, and who 
did mischief in the Northern States. A Board of 
three Commissioners was to be appointed for these 
claims, one by each nation and one by them jointly, 
and if they could not agree the Spanish Minister at 
Washington was to appoint. That Board met at 
Washington and passed on some 500 claims, in most 
instances unanimously. 

Another matter of arbitration arose out of the pro- 
visions of this Treaty itself in respect of the privi- 
leges given to the citizens of each country to fish in 
the waters of the other. A Board was to be appointed 
to investigate and pass upon this matter — one Com- 
missioner by each contracting party and a third by 
the parties jointly, or, if they could not agree, by the 
Austrian Minister at the Court of St. James. This 
Board met at Halifax, and made an award which was 

20 



much in excess of the amount the American people 
had anticipated. For some time it looked as though 
the award would not be accepted by the United 
States; but better counsels prevailed, and the amount 
was at length paid. 

There was also a question of boundary left un- 
settled. In the Treaty of 1846, the boundary 
line at the extreme West was thus described — 
"the middle of the channel which separates the 
Continent from Vancouver Island." This itself 
arose from a compromise. Up to 1818, Britain claimed 
the land in the west down to the Columbia River, 
which, at its mouth, was between 46 or 47 degrees 
N.L., while the United States claimed north to 54 de- 
grees 40 minutes. In 1818, an arrangement was en- 
tered into by the two countries that all this territory 
should be open for ten years to settlement by citizens 
of either country. In 1824 and 1826, there were 
attempts to settle the boundary, but they failed — and 
one presidential election was fought on the cry: 
"Fifty- four forty or fight." At last, in 1846, a com- 
promise offer was made by Great Britain that the line 
of 49 deg. should be taken to the ocean, and that the 
whole of Vancouver Island should be British. This 
was accepted ; and the boundary was fixed and defined 
as I have already mentioned. When, however, Van- 
couver Island came to be explored there were found to 
be not one but three main channels between the 
Island and the mainland — De Haro next to Van- 
couver, Eosario next the mainland and Douglas be- 
tween. Of course, Britain claimed that Rosario 
should be taken as "the channel"; the United States, 
De Haro. Between these lay San Juan and other 
islands, not worth much except as a source of irrita- 
tion and as affording a possible pretext for war. An 
American commander, Harvey, occupied the island of 
San Juan with an armed force. British men-of-war 
were sent out, and war was perilously near. But com- 
mon sense prevailed: negotiations resulted in the 

21 



joint occupation of the Island for the time being by 
British and American soldiers. 

By the Treaty of Washington, the question was re- 
ferred for determination to the Emperor of Ger- 
many: he decided in favour of the American claim, 
and you got the Islands. Then, in 1873, the whole 
boundary was finally settled (except on the Alaska 
side) by the Commissioners. 

Canadians have a story that the compromise of 
1846 was offered by Pakenham, the British Ambassa- 
dor, because he had heard that the salmon in the 
Columbia River would not rise to a fly ; and as a con- 
sequence that river, in his opinion, was quite value- 
less. The "few arpents of snow" which the French 
gave up without regret found their correlative in a 
river with salmon so destitute of spirit that they 

would not take a fly. 

****** 

Everyone must know of the trouble the seal fishing 
in the Pacific Ocean is still causing — the trouble was 
more acute twenty years ago. The United States 
claimed a sovereignty over the waters of the Pacific 
and the seal fisheries in that ocean, which Britain 
(and Canada) refused to acknowledge. Armed ves- 
sels were sent by the United States to patrol these 
waters, and some seizures were made of Canadian 
vessels. This is the stuff that wars are made of — and 
it must be recognized that had Britain been looking 
for war she had pretexts at hand which were more 
weighty than many upon which long and sanguinary 
wars have been waged. But the American command- 
ers, far from their government, acted with prudence ; 
and neither people was anxious for an armed struggle. 
A modus vivendi was arrived at: and subsequently a 
Board of Arbitrators was agreed upon to determine 
the matters in controversy. By this Treaty of 1892 
each power was to name two Commissioners and the 
King of Sweden and Norway, the King of Italy and 
the President of France one each, making a Board of 

22 



seven in all. One of these was a Canadian Minister of 
the Crown, and Canadians took much of the burden 
of the reference. This was the Paris Commission, 
which awarded $425,000 to be paid by the United 
States to the subjects of Britain. 

The only part of the international boundary not 
settled was on the Alaska side. Canada claimed most 
of the long tongue to the south of the main part of 
Alaska and running along by the sea. Americans said, 
"What we have we will hold" — and negotiations 
came to an impasse. In 1903 it was agreed to refer 
the matter to a tribunal of six jurists of repute, three 
to be named by each Government. Two Canadians, 
three Americans, sat upon this tribunal, and the sixth 
was Lord Alverstone, Lord Chief Justice of England. 
This Board sat during the then ensuing summer in 
London, and gave a decision in which the Canadian 
members did not concur. But the majority award 
was accepted, and has been loyally submitted to. 

In 1908 a Treaty of Arbitration was entered into at 
Washington by the United States and Great Britain 
after the failure of the previous Treaty of 1897 
through the Senate refusing to approve. It pro- 
vided that differences which might arise of a legal 
nature, or relating to the interpretation of treaties 
existing between the two contracting parties, and 
which could not be settled by diplomacy, should be re- 
ferred to the permanent Court of Arbitration estab- 
lished at The Hague by the convention of July 29th, 
1899, provided they did not affect the vital interests, 
the independence or the honour of the two contracting 
States, and did not concern the interests of third 
parties. 

Article II provides that in each individual case the 
parties were to conclude a special agreement defining 
the matter in dispute, the scope of the powers of the 
arbitrators and the times to be set for the several 
stages of the procedure. 

It was in conformity with the provisions of this 

23 



Treaty that the special agreement was entered into, 
with the concurrence of the governments of Canada 
and Newfoundland, for submission to The Hague 
Permanent Court of Arbitration of questions re- 
lating to fisheries of the North Atlantic Coast. The 
questions arose under the convention of 1818, which 
gave (Article I) certain rights to the inhabitants of 
the United States to fish in British waters. This 
special agreement, signed at Washington, January 
27th, 1909, confirmed by interchange of notes March 
4th, 1909, set out the matters in dispute, and the con- 
tentions of either party. 

The Board appointed contained the Chief Justice 
of Canada and a Justice of United States Circuit 
Court of Appeals, as well as an Austrian, a Dutch- 
man and an Argentine. Canadian counsel again took 
part in the presentation of the case of Great Britain, 
and assumed much of the burden of its preparation. 

The result seems to have been satisfactory to both 
sides, as each claims a substantial victory. "O, si 



sic omnes." 



" Peace hath her victories no less renowned than 
war"; and can anything be of grander significance 
than the fact that two nations who are among the 
most powerful that ever existed, whose whole history 
is full of deeds of valour on the tented field, who fear 
no foe and who feel a stain like a wound, have for 
more than a century found peaceful means for the 
settlement of disputes, sometimes of a grave nature, 
and the accommodation of misunderstandings not 
seldom acute? And questions of very varied charac- 
ter have thus been disposed of. The obligation to pay 
for runaway slaves and their value, the right to fish in 
certain waters, and the amount to be paid for fisheries 
where no such right exists, the value of lands taken by 
a Government from the citizens of another nation, 
the determination of River and Channel, the owner- 
ship of island and other territory — money, land, na- 
tional boundary — all have been considered and suc- 

24 



cessf ully considered. For while I do not at all say that 
I have made an accurate division of the various treat- 
ies, this, broadly, is the result : Of matters which were 
peculiarly pecuniary, there were five submitted — two 
arbitrations were wholly successful and three were 
not successful. Of matters which were not simply 
pecuniary, but involved territory or something of 
that kind, ten were submitted to commissioners — 
eight arbitrations were wholly successful and two not 
successful. There were four references to sovereigns, 
three of which were successful. Therefore, of the 
nineteen references, thirteen were wholly successful 
and only six have failed : and this I venture to say is 
an admirable showing. 

How do we now stand? There are three main 
agreements, the Treaty of 1908 (of which I have al- 
ready spoken), another of 1909 (the Waterways 
Treaty of much the same character) , and the Rush- 
Bagot Convention of 1817. 

The Waterways Treaty was signed January 11th, 
1909; it provides for the establishment and main- 
tenance of an International Joint Commission of the 
United States and Canada — three appointed by each 
government — which commission should (Article 
VIII) have jurisdiction over and pass upon all cases 
involving the use, obstruction or diversion of the 
waters between the United States and Canada. 
Article IX contains an agreement that all matters of 
difference between the countries involving the rights, 
obligations or interests of either in relation to the 
other or to the inhabitants of the other along the fron- 
tier, shall be referred to this commission for inquiry 
and report. Article X provides that any question or 
matter of difference involving the rights, obligations 
or interests of the United States or of Canada, either 
in relation to each other or to their respective inhabit- 
ants, may be referred for decision to this Interna- 
tional Joint Commission. If the commission be 
equally divided an umpire is to be chosen in the man- 

25 



ner provided by Act 45 of The Hague convention of 
October 18th, 1907. This may be called a miniature 
Hague tribunal of our own, just for us English-speak- 
ing nations of the Continent of North America. And 
it goes further than the Treaty of 1908, as will be seen 
by reference to its provisions. 

The Rush-Bagot arrangement arose in this way: 
during the war of 1812 some damage had been done 
and more annoyance caused by armed vessels upon 
the Great Lakes. The Treaty of Ghent did not 
provide that such armed forces should not be 
kept up; but it became apparent to both sides 
that it would be well strictly to limit the number 
and quality of armed vessels upon the fresh waters 
between the two countries. After some negotiation 
notes were interchanged, April 28th and 29th, 1817, 
containing the " Rush-Bagot convention,' ? which 
notes contained an agreement by one and the other 
party limiting the naval force to be kept on the lakes 
to a very few: on Lake Ontario, one vessel; on the 
Upper Lakes, two vessels ; on Lake Champlain, one 
vessel ; none of the vessels to exceed one hundred tons 
burden, and each to have but one cannon of 18 pounds. 
It was agreed to dismantle forthwith all other armed 
vessels on the lakes, and that no other vessels of war 
should be there built or armed; six months' notice 
to be given by either party of desire of annulling the 
stipulation. 

The arrangement was, after some delay, submitted 
by the President to the Senate, and that body in 1818 
approved of and consented to it. I understand that 
constitutional lawyers in the United States — and all 
lawyers in the United States are constitutional law- 
yers — are not agreed as to the necessity for the Presi- 
dent to lay this agreement before the Senate or for the 
Senate to approve of it. 

It has been strictly observed, except where the 
consent of Canada has been obtained to trifling varia- 

26 



tions from its terms, variations more in the letter 
than in the spirit. 

The understanding was, however, in great danger 
in 1864. The Minister of the United States in Lon- 
don was instructed in October of that year to give the 
six months' notice required to terminate the agree- 
ment; and Mr. Adams did so, with the subsequent 
approval of Congress. Before the lapse of the time 
specified, however, matters on the lakes had taken a 
different turn, and the United States expressed a de- 
sire that the arrangement should continue and be ob- 
served by both parties. This was acceded to, and ever 
since the convention has been considered in full force. 

But there remains one thing more to mention. At 
a recent meeting of the American Society for the 
Judicial Settlement of International Disputes, the 
President of the United States gave utterance to an 
epoch-making statement — I have always thought that 
the President of the United States of America has 
the greatest power for good or ill of any man upon the 
face of the earth — and in this instance the President 
rose to the height even of his great opportunity. 
Mr. Taft said in substance: "There is no reason why 
every international question should not be submitted 
to judicial arbitrament, whether it be a question of 
money or of territory or of national honour." Mr. 
Taft has since that time, amid the harassing cares and 
multitudinous labours of his great office, continued 
to press on the adoption of arbitration methods. 
His efforts have been recognized and seconded by 
statesmen and churchmen in the mother country, and 
in Canada. 

But few discordant notes are to be heard. Of 
course, the "fire-eater" is not dead, nor the pessi- 
mist, nor he who can walk only per vias antiquas, 
while the fool we have always with us. We hear that 
wars are necessary to keep down population, although 
the same argument is not advanced for famine. . . 

. . . — that war is needed to awaken and keep 

27 



alive valour and masculine virtues generally, al- 
though those who know most about war know best the 
absurdity of the argument: there is more valour 
in one day of attendance upon the sick in an epidemic 
than in a month of active warfare. I undertake to 
find ten men to face bullet or bayonet for every one 
who will face smallpox or malignant fever.* We are 
told that questions of national honour cannot be ar- 
bitrated, and that if any nation were to fire a shot at 
a peaceful ship of another, war must ensue, although 
Britain did not suffer in the eyes of the world or in 
her own, because she submitted to international arbi- 
tration when her peaceful fishermen were shot down ' 
on the Dogger Bank ; that a man does not go to law 
when someone assaults his wife, as though that justi- 
fied him in stealing the other's fish — or as though the 
circumstance that some outrage might be so gross that 
law would be forgotten, furnished an argument 
against law in general. 

All these objections will, in the long run, fail: and 
the objectors will — must — suffer defeat. The brute, 
the tiger, must die, for what is war but a survival of 
the brute within? Whether man was evolving up 
from the lower animal or devolving down from a state 
little if any lower than the angels when he first made 
his appearance as man, I shall not discuss in the 
presence of learned theologians and accomplished 
scientists — we in Ontario are having our little 
troubles over questions of this kind, and I do not 
propose to get into hot water in New York State if I 
can avoid it. One way or the other, he was but 
little removed from the brute. He had the weapons of 
the brute, the tooth and claw — and he had adopted 
improved weapons, the club wielded by brawny arm, 
and the missile stone projected by strong and deft 

* , . . ug- rpic av Trap' aoTrida 

OTTjvai diXoi/j.' civ fiaXkov t) tekeIv ana!-. 

— Eurip. Medea 11. 250, 251. 

28 



band. He was judge of what he would have, and 
of what he would not have : and wife and child and 
neighbour were kept in order by the tooth and claw, 
the club and stone. And then prevailed 

" the good old rule, 

the simple plan, 

That they should take who have the power 

And they should keep who can." 

That is anarchy, the state that is spoken of in the 
good old book, "In those days there was no King in 
Israel, but every man did that which was right in his 
own eyes." 

In affairs relating to the sept or clan, it was soon 
found that this would not do — that that sept or clan 
would die which allowed the rule of might alone to 
govern. A house divided against itself cannot stand. 

Accordingly, public opinion began to have its effect. 
The tremendous power of public opinion in a primi- 
tive community no one who has not lived in or closely 
observed such a community can appreciate. Gradual- 
ly it became a custom for disputes between individual 
and individual in the same clan or sept to be referred 
for decision to some independent tribunal — whether 
the chief who spoke "themistes" given by the god, or 
the priest also inspired by the god, or companion war- 
rior. Such a tribunal, if temporary and for a special 
case only, is a board of arbitration ; if permanent and 
for all cases, a Court — call it by what name you 
will. The more recourse was had to such tribunals 
and the less to club law, the more civilized the nation. 
All nations who can be called civilized have long 
grown out of the habit of allowing any man or body of 
men to assert and maintain by the strong hand what 
they conceive to be their right. 

And this, although public opinion will permit a 
gross insult to be resented and physically punished 
on the spot. 

Now man not far removed from the primitive 
state applied his club law to affairs international 

29 



as well as domestic — the rule was co-extensive 
with his relation to fellow-man — " fellow-human 
being" I mean. For woman did not escape the uni- 
versal law; she suffered from the brutal whim of her 
savage mate. In some lands it is still laid down as a 
principle — 

"A woman, a spaniel, a walnut tree, 
The more you whip them, the better they be." 

The neighbouring nation like the neighbouring man 
had to be met with club and stone : and it was the God 
of Battles who was the God of the Nations. 

It is a somewhat curious fact that it is in what re- 
lates to the nation that man is most conservative. 
Eeligion itself is made a department of national con- 
servation — and every form of religious observance is 
carefully preserved in the ancient form. When the 
people at large have thrown away the stone knife and 
replaced it with one of bronze or iron, the priest can- 
not do the same : the time-honoured stone must still be 
used. Sacred things are not to be trifled with : and 
no revised version of any ceremonial or book of doe- 
trine is to be tolerated. 

* * * * * * 

So in other matters affecting the State — the ela- 
borate ceremony and formality is retained. 

When men got over deciding private rights by club 
law within the nation, they could not take the logical 
step of doing away with club law in international dis- 
putes. For what is the battle-axe, the mace, the 
sword, but an improved club — the arrow, the Gatling 
bullet, but a form of missile, an improvement upon 
the stone ? 

I am often reminded of the little poem of Sam Wal- 
ter Foss, so well known and so pat : 

1 ' One day through the primeval wood, 
A calf walked home, as good calves should, 
But made a trail all bent askew, 
A crooked trail, as all calves do. 

30 



"Since then two hundred years have fled, 
And, I infer, the calf is dead. 
But still he left behind his trail, 
And thereby hangs my moral tale. 

"The trail was taken up next day 
By a lone dog that passed that way; 
And then a wise bell-wether sheep 
Pursued the trail o'er vale and steep, 
And drew the flock behind him, too, 
As good bell-wethers always do. 

"And from that day o'er hill and glade 
Through those old woods a path was made : 
And many men wound in and out, 
And dodged and turned and bent about 
And uttered words of righteous wrath 
Because 'twas such a crooked path. 

"But still they followed — do not laugh — 
The first migrations of that calf, 
And through this winding woodway stalked 
Because he wobbled when he walked. 

"This forest path became a lane, 
That bent and turned, and turned again ; 
This crooked lane became a road, 
Where many a poor horse with his load 
Toiled on beneath the burning sun, 
And travelled some three miles in one. 
And thus a century and a half 
They trod in the footsteps of that calf. 

' ' The years passed on in swiftness fleet ; 
The road became a village street ; 
And this, before they were aware, 
A city 's crowded thoroughfare ; 
And soon the central street was this 
Of a renowned metropolis ; 
And men two centuries and a half 
Trod in the footsteps of that calf. 

"Each day a hundred thousand rout 
Followed the zigzag calf about; 
And o'er his crooked journey went 
The traffic of a continent. 
A hundred thousand men were led 
By one calf near three centuries dead ; 

31 



They followed still his crooked way 
And lost one hundred years a day — 
For such reverence is lent 
To well-established precedent. 

"A moral lesson this might teach, 
"Were I ordained and callecl to preach : 
For men are prone to go it blind 
Along the calf paths of the mind, 
And work away from sun to sun 
To do what other men have done. 

" They follow in the beaten track, 
And in and out, and forth and back, 
And still their devious course pursue, 
To keep the path that others do. 
But how the wise old wood gods laugh 
"Who saw the first primeval calf ! 
Many things this tale might teach, 

■ But I am not ordained to preach. ' ' 

So it is — and the way of man with his fellow-man is 
alike conservative. And it may cost as much effort to 
turn men away from the old methods of international 
dealing as from the old ways of communication from 
place to place. 

But of this be well assured. The city may continue 
to have her crooked streets, because they were crooked 
when her world was young: but the old manner of 
dealing of man with man must inevitably come to an 
end. For "Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts — show 
mercy and compassion every man to his brother.'' 

The splendid services to the cause of peace ren- 
dered by the late President of this nation are followed 
by the still more splendid services of Mr. Taft, en- 
thusiastically supported as he is by statesmen of both 
sides of politics — and the people of the United States 
may well be proud that the first practical steps to- 
wards international peace throughout the world are 
made within and by their nation. 

The Prince of Peace cometh — perhaps not to-day 
or to-morrow, but He must needs come — and "Blessed 
are the peacemakers : for they shall be called the chil- 
dren of G-od." 

32